Are councils embracing an agile future … or is it cost-saving without the transformation?

By Heather Cameron

An increasingly diverse working population means that more people require and expect enhanced flexibility to help them balance their lives at work and at home, manage a range of different caring responsibilities and transition into retirement, for example, by reducing hours or through adaptations to how they work.” (CIPD, 2014)

The needs of the workforce is changing. No longer is nine to five office working the norm as more and more employees expect flexible working environments.

According to the CIPD, these changing needs, combined with the fast pace of economic change, require organisations to adopt more agile working practices. And this applies to both the public and private sectors.

What is agile working?

The concept of agile working refers to a way of working that incorporates time and place flexibility. It enables employees to work where, how and when they choose, subject to business needs, in order to improve work/life balance and maximise productivity. It is a move away from the reliance on the office location towards a culture that incorporates remote working and more dynamic office spaces.

The Agile Future Forum defines agile working practices along four dimensions:

  • Time: when do they work? (e.g. part-time working; staged retirement)
  • Location: where do they work? (e.g. people working across multiple sites)
  • Role: what do they do? (e.g. multi-skilling)
  • Source: who is employed? (e.g. using contractors or temps)

In addition to offering practical solutions to help improve the work-life balance of the workforce, agile working can also provide the opportunity to reduce and control operational costs. One of the biggest costs for any organisation, whether in the private or public sector, is the fixed costs associated with buildings and furniture.

As local government finances continue to be squeezed, councils face an ongoing dilemma of having to try and reduce costs while maintaining service delivery. So perhaps agile working is a way of achieving this.

Cost savings?

 As a recent briefing paper on agile working in the public sector has highlighted, it is no surprise that the public sector estate should be earmarked for cost savings and reform, given its vast scale. The local government estate consists of over 180,000 buildings, with a value of £250 billion and annual running costs of £25 billion.

Council offices are also often housed in old inefficient buildings that are often located in prime real estate sites that could be sold for redevelopment. “They have become valuable assets that are ill-suited to their current purpose.”

And many of these buildings are underutilised. According to the briefing paper, the majority of local government buildings have a desk occupancy rate of 45% and a meeting room occupancy rate of 60% – meaning that there can be as many as 297,000 empty desks on any given day and numerous underutilised meeting and conference rooms.

It is therefore no wonder we have seen a move by councils to introduce agile working in recent years.

Agile working in local government

Earlier this year, it was reported that Angus Council plans to invest £2.2 million in two buildings to promote agile working among its staff. This forms part of the council’s plans to close 32 offices in a bid to save almost £5 million a year from its budget.

Head of technical and property services at Angus said:

“The investment in works and furniture will provide modern office environments to support staff adopting new ways of working aligned with the agile culture, while reducing the council’s existing estate portfolio.”

In 2013 Monmouthshire Council opened a new £6 million headquarters with only 88 desks for 200 staff. The new office was created to help facilitate the council’s agile working policy and reduce costs.

Lambeth Council is moving from 14 operating sites to just 2, with a 10:6 desk ratio. The council’s flexible working strategy aims to help reduce its real estate costs by £4.5 million per year.

It has been argued that the main catalyst for change across councils has been the creation of the government’s One Public Estate initiative, launched in 2013.

Under the initiative, councils in England have freed up land for around 9,000 homes and created 20,000 jobs. It is expected that the councils involved will raise £129 million in capital receipts from land sales and cut running costs by £77 million over 5 years.

Final thoughts

The potential cost savings from agile working would seem undeniable. But does the adoption of agile working in local government represent true transformation?

Of course, it is more difficult to embed a shift in culture change within an organisation than it is to merely convince people that agile working is beneficial. Nevertheless, the success stories from Timewise Councils suggest that transformation is happening.


If you enjoyed reading this post, you might like our previous post on flexible working.

Follow us on Twitter to see what developments in public and social policy are interesting our research team.

Co-production in social care … a need for systems change

meeting

By Rebecca Jackson

One of our most popular member briefings has been our 2014 introduction to co-production in public services. In fact, it was so popular that we made it freely available to download from our website. For those who don’t know, co-production is an approach to improving or developing services by working collaboratively with the people who use those services. It has become increasingly popular within many types of public services in the UK, but especially in health and social care.

The components of co-production

But what does co-production actually mean in practice? Although every case is different, generally it can be broken down into several processes:

  • Co-design – the planning of services
  • Co-decision making – with regards to the distribution of resources and the allocation of services
  • Co-delivery (of services) – including outlining the role of volunteers and the third sector, and including them in the process if necessary
  • Co-evaluation (of services) – assessment of the outcomes and whether they have been successful for all parties involved.

Legislation and implementation

The 2014 Care Act was one of the first pieces of UK legislation to include co-production as a concept in its statutory guidance, stating that:

‘Local authorities should, where possible, actively promote participation in providing interventions that are co-produced with individuals, families, friends, carers and the community. ”Co-production” is when an individual influences the support and services received, or when groups of people get together to influence the way that services are designed, commissioned and delivered.’

Co-production is now a key part of the implementation of health and social care strategy across the UK. It provides service users with an input on which elements of services are of most use, and which could be altered to make them more effective – particularly important at a time when local authorities are under pressure to deliver more efficient and cost-effective services.

Co-production relates to other strategic priorities such as prevention, wellbeing, a focus on outcomes and the personalisation agenda. It allows people who use services to have a direct input into the design of care services and care plans, so as to create more effective programmes of care.

Implementing co-production can be a difficult transition and requires a whole system approach to change. This means that organisations, such as local authorities, must adopt change at every level to encourage meaningful participation and to embed co-production in day-to-day practices.

Managing change

The SCIE co-production guidance uses a jigsaw model for management of change which may be a helpful way to identify the elements of an organisation which must be altered to effectively incorporate co production.

jigsaw 3The guidance provided by the Social Care Institute for Excellence (SCIE) recommends that:

  • organisations must change at every level, from senior management to front-line staff,  if they want to achieve meaningful participation
  • participation should become part of daily practice – and not be a one-off activity
  • participation operates at different levels, as there are many ways to involve people who use services in different types of decisions

Social care co-production in practice

  • The project PRESENT is a joint initiative between East Dunbartonshire Council, the local Dementia Network, the Joint Improvement Team and Governance International, which uses co-production to engage people with dementia and enable dementia sufferers to make a positive contribution to their communities.
  • Islington Council has developed a Framework for Involvement in Adult Social Care to provide a solid base for co-production that is accessible, inclusive and has impact. The council worked with people who use services and carers to produce the Framework. Local statutory and voluntary sector organisations, including the Making it Real Experts by Experience and Project Team, and Healthwatch Islington, were also involved.
  • A report produced in 2013 by the Scottish Co-production Network, Governance International, the Scottish Joint Improvement Team and the Social Care Alliance,  also provided comparisons between the approaches to co-production in social care between Scotland and Sweden.

These are just a few examples of innovative practice, more of which can be found on the SCIE website.

The potential of co-production

Co-production has the potential to transform the way social care is delivered in the UK. However, implementing co-production approaches into existing organisations, with their own culture, structures and operating procedures, as well as their own expectations about services and how they should be created and delivered, remains a challenge for commissioners, the third and private sectors, politicians and the public.

In order to be successful and to produce sustainable and effective relationships, total change will be required and it will take a huge commitment and long term vision to ensure its success. Once implemented, though, it is clear that co-production has the potential to contribute greatly to prevention, personalisation and outcomes-focused service delivery – which are all key agendas in the current health and social care policy climate.


Read some of our other recent blogs:

Follow us on Twitter to see what developments in public and social policy are interesting our research team.

The renaissance of Building Control

Builder_Architect_rsz

Post–recession, the building industry has begun a return to rapid growth against a background of changes in building regulations, continuing technical innovation, and raised standards and expectations for developers. Building Control (the process of ensuring that buildings are safe, healthy and efficient to meet the standards set by the building regulations) is a key component in this resurgence and it’s no surprise that the Local Authority Building Control technical meeting at Nottingham University scheduled for 23 and 24 March has a packed programme and is entirely sold out.

With over 3,000 professionals working in the field and faced with competition from private service providers, Local Authorities are coming together to make infrastructure investments that will improve services and ultimately reduce costs.  A good example is the North Yorkshire Building Control Partnership formed in 2001 and now grown to provide services for five authorities.  Latest figures from NYBCP show savings of over £1m annually through this scalable and flexible shared-service platform.

The programme behind this required vision and commitment to deliver and involved hosting arrangements for a new single system, local network and IT services with support, and data migration from five legacy systems.  A case study published by NYBCP describes the programme in detail.

And the key metrics:

  • £1M reduction in salary costs
  • 55% of all applications are born digital or received digitally
  • Major reduction in processing costs
  • Remote access and remote working for stakeholders and officers
  • Improved customer service delivery as administrators are able to validate and process applications within 3 – 5 minutes

A last word to Les Chapman, NYBCP Head of Building Control, who commented, “By adopting a no compromise approach and having clear goals which have been carefully monitored I am confident that we have improved our service, significantly reduced our costs and we have de-risked the provision and maintenance of our IT systems.”

References

Local Authority Building Control

NYBCP case study

Gloucester City and Stroud DC business case for Building Control shared-service

8 ways local authorities can support community empowerment in an age of austerity

community signby Stephen Lochore

Austerity measures implemented by the UK Government since 2010 have reduced funding for some public services and aspects of welfare.  Although local government has attempted to absorb real-term reductions in funding, for example by sharing corporate functions, the scale of the cuts is reducing direct delivery in some service areas.  Discretionary community-level support services have been disproportionately affected by austerity measures. Continue reading

Using service design for user-focused, cost-effective public services

business people reviewing plans

by Laura Dobie

Faced with growing demand and reduced budgets, public services are increasingly looking for innovative ways to meet user needs with declining resources. Ahead of this weekend’s Global Service Jam, here’s a quick look at how service design can transform public services. Continue reading